Top News Story

Bush ramps up the rhetoric on Iran.

John Pohoretz, The New York Post reported that President Bush just delivered what may be the most important speech of his presidency. The time has come, the president all but said yesterday, to take the gloves off with Iran.

The Wall Street Journal reported that in a major speech President Bush quoted extensively from recent threats by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad such as his call for "a world without the United States and Zionism."

Ahmadinejad threatens Bush and the American people.

Khaleej Times Online reported on a veiled threat from hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to US President George W. Bush.

Reuters reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad urged the West to turn to God's path and said that failure to do so would tempt fate.

Khatami bashes Bush.

RegisterGuard reported that Khatami is using his visit to the US to bash Bush but still refuses to take questions from the media at these events.

Reuters reported that Germany said Iran could not be allowed to harm the United Nations by pursuing its nuclear program. But Merkel made clear that military action against Iran was not an option.

The Telegraph reported the casual contempt with which Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, rejected Kofi Annan's attempt to mediate in the stand-off over Teheran's nuclear ambitions is alarming and that the UN is in danger of becoming an expensive irrelevance.

The Australian reported that talks to kickstart negotiations on Iran's nuclear ambitions between Iranian and EU officials had been postponed.

Russia finally supports sanctions on Iran.

The Jerusalem Post reported that Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said his country supports placing sanctions on Iran, in hope that implementing sanctions would rule out the possibility of military action against Iran.

Poll: US and France support military action against Iran as a last resort.

Reuters reported that a major transatlantic opinion survey showed most French and Americans would support military action against Iran as a last resort if other means fail to stop it acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iranian military unveils new fighter and bomb.

Forbes reported that Iran unveiled its first locally manufactured fighter plane, similar to the American F-18 fighter plane, but "more powerful."

DNA India reported that Iran announced that it has developed a 900 kg guided bomb named Ghased, or "Messenger."

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the editor of the Weekly Standard, William Kristol proposed a resolution authorizing force against Iran for its defiance of a U.N. deadline to end uranium enrichment. The proposal received a lukewarm reaction at the White House.

The Boston Globe reported on the visit of Khatami to the US and argued that when it comes to Iran, the Bush administration has been consistent only in its inconsistency. Time and again it has condemned the Tehran regime and time and again it has failed to back up those condemnations with action.

Stanley Kurtz, National Review Online reported that Iran may soon have nuclear weapons and argued Iran may soon dictate that its neighbors treat it as a de facto nuclear power and that will change the world.

Rooz Online published an interview with Majlis (Iran's Parliament) representative from Tabriz Akbar Alami who complained of restrictions that have been placed on MPs and said that nothing except a posh building façade remains of the Majlis (Iran's Parliament).

Rooz Online reported that Iran's Ministry of Islamic Guidance, which controls the media in this country, issued a directive to press publications which in practice bans them from quoting all available news sources in their reporting.

We've been listening to Glenn Beck's show in the evenings and he has been excellent on the Iranian situation. He's been reading quotes from speeches given by Ahmadinejad and Khatami, pointing out what Iran is actually threatening.

I've always believed that Bush & Cheney will do whatever is necessary to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons. This speech appears to confirm that view. I truly believe that using all our non-nuclear weapons we could capture Tehran in less than three months with a six week air war followed by a three week ground invasion. This current Iranian regime must shut down its nuclear weapons program or else the regime has to be removed before Bush leaves office in 2009. It's just too dangerous to leave this situation unresolved for a future president who could be too slow to act against Iran, and that could force the Israelis to use tactical nukes against Iran to save their nation. We surely don't want that to happen so it's much better to handle this ourselves with help from Israel and anyone in Europe who wants to help us.

5
posted on 09/08/2006 11:36:52 AM PDT
by defenderSD
(The concept of national martyrdom, combined with nuclear weapons, is extremely dangerous.)

There is also a possible way to topple Iran's mullahs without a massive invasion. The USA has naval superiority in the Persian Gulf. The bulk of Iran's oil production consists of offshore platforms, which the navy can take at any time with impunity. Most of the rest of Iran's oil is found very near its' shores, and could also be taken, though just taking the platforms would bankrupt Iran in short order, while shedding very little blood. As long as the US kept the flows to China in place, China should play ball.

That's a good idea. The only problem is that it would take longer to complete the regime change by bankrupting Iran, and so the regime change might drag on into the election campaign of 2008 and possibly not even be completed by the end of Bush's term. But we may be able to try a two-phased approach where the first phase is to seize their oil assets while assisting democracy supporters in Iran, then if that doesn't work we would do a fast invasion against a weakend Iranian army. The Iranian army might be very low on key supplies and motor fuel at that point so a bankruptcy could make an invasion much easier.

Let's hope the Iranians come to their senses and agree to end their nuclear weapons program, and I still think that will probably happen in the end after long negotations and a lot of fierce rhetoric from both sides.

7
posted on 09/08/2006 12:22:05 PM PDT
by defenderSD
(The concept of national martyrdom, combined with nuclear weapons, is extremely dangerous.)

"The only problem is that it would take longer to complete the regime change by bankrupting Iran,..."

After Iraq, I don't count on fast anything. I agree with you on the main point, Bush will act if Iran doesn't play ball. On your last sentence, I just don't have a feel for that, but it would be nice if you are correct.

Yeah, this is a really tough situation to predict. I don't have a good sense for the level of rational thinking in the Iranian regime. They could be even crazier than they appear to be, in which case they may think they don't have to play ball and they can defeat us in a war. In that case, it will end in a relatively short war, followed by a lengthy process of putting a new government in place. We will need help from the rest of the world to set up a new semi-democratic government, if it happens.

9
posted on 09/08/2006 1:04:53 PM PDT
by defenderSD
(The concept of national martyrdom, combined with nuclear weapons, is extremely dangerous.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.